Losing soulbound when an enemy heals?


2-3 should be enough, after the warrior got loot once we have a sure answer.


It could be as simple as the game “adds” a player name whenever they reach the sb X amount, and so with a healing enemy, it really could keep adding more and more names, until the enemy dies.

With possibility that if the enemy ever gets back up to its initial top HP value, the sb names table gets cleared back to empty.


SB threshold is a % of max hp

Max hp doesnt change when the guy heals, so it should be fine. The enemy only becomes capable of letting more players surpass the threshold


We tested it with my friend on constructs once. He did half damage to each, then allowed them to heal back to full hp, then I killed all of them. He got an attack and a pbag from two of them. So my guess it works the same with all healing enemies (including tomb bosses). The other thing which makes me think that it’s true is that it would require too much additional coding to recalculate and reset sb damage for all players after healing, I doubt Kabam would do that.

Note that it doesn’t work with a Pentaract because its towers don’t heal, they respawn. If a tower respawned, it technically became a new enemy entity with new max hp buffer and it resets sb which was dealt to a previous tower. Source: I finished a solo Pentaract which had all towers almost at 0 hp. I respawned all of them first and then killed it normally, I got some potions.


You speak with conviction. How can you be so sure?

Soulbound threshold could be a percent of the total damage dealt to an enemy. In the cases of non healing enemies, the total damage dealt is equal to the max health of the enemy, but not so in the case of healing enemies.

If the soulbound threshold is based on total damage received by the enemy, there could be a scenario where: first, I deal just enough damage to reach the soulbound threshold while the enemy is not healing; second, the enemy heals to full health; third, the enemy dies with no more damage from me other than the damage I did in the first part of the scenario. This way, my damage is not past the soulbound threshold even though I did more than the supposed percent damage of the enemy’s max health.

I’m not saying you’re lying, you probably have a good reason to say soulbound threshold only take max health into consideration.


I can’t tell much about my resources, non disclosure agreement and all that.

However, I did just recheck. Turns out my memory is poor. It is actually percentage of all the damage dealt, not of maxhp

[quote=“Mrunibro, post:13, topic:10632”]
SB threshold is a % of max hp
[/quote] ^noob

O3 Soulbound

So, that answers it then? You can, after all, lose your soulbound damage when an enemy heals.


@Werbenja pls explain the unscientific part of this experiment.


The biggest problem I see with it is that we don’t know the soulbound threshold for Bilgewater. @GHZD used a warrior to test it and, for all we know, he could have gone way past the threshold, to the point where the damage he dealt is still within the percent of total damage dealt the threshold dictates, even with the trickster dealing much more damage in the whole fight.

It is kinda weird, because in the first instance of the experiment, where there was only GHZD and a trickster, Dreadstump was healed a lot, maybe more than his max health. But to really disprove the myth, we would first need to find out the exact souldbound threshold of Dreadstump and then repeat what was done in the video as many times as possible.

But in the end, it isn’t unscientific. He had a theory and he went out to test it, run of the mill science to me. I just think he overlooked a few issues and his conclusion might have suffered because of that.


If sb is a % of total damage dealt, as @Mrunibro asserts,

Then for any enemy where the healing is continuous (eg. Bilgewater, tomb bosses), you’d need to be aware of potentially dropping beneath the sb threshold due to the healing going on longer than expected.

Example: you do 20,000 dmg soloing Geb in a dirty tomb. 20,000 out of 90,000 being over 20%.

You think “Oh 20% I’ll be fine” so you go afk in another room and wait for the others to finish off the tomb. But the group is really bad, and Nut gives Geb a ton of heals, meaning Geb doesn’t take 90,000 dmg to die, but 150,000.

Now your dmg is 20,000 out of 150,000, less than 15%, not the 20% you originally thought you’d done.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stkPMK3kUN0 This should answer it.


You’re absolutely right, but my gut feeling is that Bilgewater healed a ludicrous amount of HP.

Purely anecdotal, but if you’ve ever solod a docks, those things take forever even on a warrior sitting there pressing space. And he heals fast; hence why low dps classes can’t solo him. (So I think he healed his full HP multiple times over)

I understand that GHZD did do a fair amount of damage and let’s say SB threshold is 10% but GHZD thought it was 20%.

If Bilgewater healed back his full HP (I. E damage dealt is 2 times of normal), GHZD would sill be within threshold.

Any ideas on how to test it more scientifically? I could replicate this but sit for a freaking hour letting the dude heal xD (and review footage to see how much he heals)

@Nevov senpai devise a strategy pretty please or this will make me anal for a while.


Like you say, the healing of Bilgewater is SO massive in there, and took ages for the other player to kill, that the sb must be only 1 shot or something, so that any dmg will qualify the 2nd player.

You could repeat the activity with the 2nd player only doing literally 1 shot, then allowing the 2nd to solo, but I expect it will get the same result as in the vid.

The fact that in the vid both did still get the items very much proves that players don’t lose SB, the only danger as I mention is being off with your calculations because you miscalculate how much the healing is going to do, in a scenario where there isn’t guaranteed loot and you need to stay above the sb threshold.

It is scientific enough. The video provides the fundamental answer that SB isn’t removed by healing, everything else would just be testing to try and learn specific SB numbers/percentages for the enemy, which don’t really matter, it’s same old rule, “do as much damage as you can, and let the RNG roll”.


Let’s see here…
We need a theory, a method to test said theory, and the conclusion. As of the moment I’m typing this, there are 2 major theories in this thread;

  1. SB qualification is based on % of damage done to an enemy.
  2. SB qualification is based on % of damage to enemy’s max HP.

The facts:
SB damage is attained by dealing a certain amount of unknown damage

The problem:
How will SB work with an enemy which can heal?

Why is this question important? Let’s look at Jon Bilgewater as reference:
Jon’s max HP: 90000 points.
If we assume that theory 2 is correct, doing 3000 damage to Jon will grant you 1/30 or 3.33% SB level.
If we assume that theory 1 is correct, doing 3000 damage to Jon out of the… say 150,000 damage required to kill Jon (90,000 base hp +60,000 hp generated from healing), then you only have 1/50 or 2% SB level.

As we can see, the SB levels that you attain differs from theory to theory. If the SB level required for SB loot is at 2.5%, then which theory is correct will dictate who shall get loot. If theory 1 is correct, Jon’s healing should qualify more people, especially the DPS challenged, to compete for fair loot. If theory 2 is correct, then characters which can deal far more damage than other classes would leave them at lower chances for qualification.

Tools and Materials:
2 lv 20 max att/dex Sorcerer.
1 clean Deadwater Docks
1 warrior with permabuff.
1 pally with permabuff.

Proposed method:
Part 1:
I propose having both characters attack Jon simultaneously.
The first Sorcerer shall be called SorcA, and the second SorcB. They will both have recomp, and both should not use their abilities.

SorcA would constantly auto-fire at Jon.
SorcB would switch between autofiring for X seconds, then stopping for 10-X seconds, with X being less than 10.
This will be done by both characters attacking Jon at a safe distance, with the assistance of buffers to speed up the process.

This would mean that SorcB would always have less % of damage done to Jon than SorcA.
We would start with X value of 1, and then decreasing by half of its last value everytime SorcB gets loot.

X(1) would be 1 (10% of damage done)
X(2) would be 0.5 (5% of damage done)
X(3) would be 0.25 (2.5% of damage done)
The duration of each fight should also be recorded.

Part 2:
This should repeat until SorcB gets no more loot. When SorcB stops getting loot, the last percentage when SorcB gets loot would be noted as the Experimental Threshold (Y) and the last duration would be noted as Experimental Duration(Z).

After the Y has been found, change SorcA’s autofire rate to 5 seconds out of 10 seconds, and halve X as well. After doing this for the double the duration Z, SorcA should shoot Jon without SorcB.

If theory 1 is correct, then SorcB will not get loot on this stage, because SorcB would have done at most half of the SB level attained at part 1.

If theory 2 is correct, then SorcB will still qualify for loot because the SB level SorcB has attained stays the same.

In order to do this experiment, we will require volunteers for the clean Deadwater Docks, 2 sorcerers, a pally, and a warrior, as well as some keyboard-input software which could alternate the autofire-states of both Sorcerers, as well as a recording software to record the experiment and publish it.

However, whichever theory is correct, the best course of action for any player stays the same; Just shoot the damn target, and not leech.


That sounds like a plan. But how feasible is it?

Something easier we can do is try to falsify the premise “soulbound threshold is based on max hp” by assuming it is true and finding one counter-example. Do normal soulbound threshold testing (like this one, but with someone else to finish the boss instead of a pet) on Bilgewater to find a range where the soulbound threshold is and then reproduce it on various occasions with different classes.

If it is based on max hp, then we won’t be able to falsify it and that’s strong evidence that the premise is true, but more testing would be required (like the one BaraBlazer proposed) to have a final veridict. But if it isn’t based on max hp, we only need one example where someone didn’t get loot while dealing more damage than the max damage of the range established and the premise is falsified. Still, that wouldn’t prove that soulbound damage depends only on total damage dealt, but I don’t see any other way the loot system could work that would be consistent with what we observe in our daily RotMG lives.

I’m loving the theorycrafting guys, keep’em coming!


A feasible example… I suppose since the SB threshold is so low, we can do this too;

Materials and tools:
Wizard lv 20 max dex/att
Sorc, prefferably lv 20
Optional: warr & pally w/permabuff

Part 1: Standard SB threshold test

  1. Sorc will shoot at Jon to X damage. Where X is < than wizard’s total damage at all times. Recommended starting value is ~3000 damage.
  2. Wizard attacks Jon until he dies, prefferably while buffed by a Pally and Warr
  3. If sorc does not acquire loot, increase X by 1000. If Sorc does acquire loot, X damage by 500.
  4. Repeat step 1-3 until temp. SB threshold is found.
    Temp. SB threshold is found when X needs to change from decreasing in value to increasing.
    Example: X was tested until 5000, which should decrease to 4500 on the next test. If X should increase further, the temp. SB threshold shall be 4500 to 5000. If not, the threshold shall be 4000 to 4500.

Part 2: The Theory Test

  1. The sorc shall attack until the sorc has passed our temp. SB threshold
  2. Wizard shall attack Jon until he is near death (visibly less than a quarter health left)
  3. Let Jon heal
  4. Wizard shall attack until Jon dies.

if SB is based off damage done, the Sorc should not get any loot.
if SB is based off max HP%, then further testing is required to confirm which theory is correct, as it could fall under the range of minimum SB threshold.

Part 3: Reconfirming
To confirm the theory even further the Sorc should deal 4/7 of X, before letting the wizard kill Jon.

If after killing Jon, the Sorc does not acquire loot, then the true theory is the % of HP required.

If after killing Jon, the Sorc still has acquired loot, then a new Minimum SB Treshold has been found, and part 1 should be redone.

How about that?
Edit: darnit, now I’m confused. Let me make some visual aids…
Edit2: I got the theories better wrapped around my head now. I’ll see if I can post my train of thoughts here.


I know that’s only an example, but we can be much more precise than that. A range of 50 health doesn’t seem that hard to reach.

By the way, I’d love to see people volunteer for the job. You know, people with more free time to play the game than me.


These are all just theories on what the sb needed to get loot is…


Yeah, for general realm players, this shouldn’t matter too much, but theorycrafting is fun.


Just curious, what other games do you play?